[HN Gopher] Founder's Choice
___________________________________________________________________
Founder's Choice
Author : vinnyglennon
Score : 68 points
Date : 2022-05-04 15:11 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (founderschoicevc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (founderschoicevc.com)
| yowlingcat wrote:
| Seems like a well intentioned product (certainly would have loved
| to have this tool prior to raising) but the level of data you're
| asking for that could get back to a founder will have a chilling
| effect on the negative reviews which will also happen to be the
| most valuable.
|
| I get adding the verification steps to make sure the data is
| "real" but if founders want to leave any feedback online about
| investors they've worked with (already unlikely), they're more
| likely to leave it on a forum like vcguide.
| flyinglizard wrote:
| Aspiring founders: VC experience will change drastically based
| on:
|
| a) the partner you meet
|
| b) how badly they want you
|
| c) macro/fund context
|
| d) what's your fit to them or the competitive environment around
| your company
|
| And it's not always apparent what's good and what's bad, long
| term speaking. We're deep into an A round meeting many funds and
| I can't say any single one stands out. Sure some have better
| chemistry with us, but they are all playing the same book. (other
| than one who has been especially shit and crafty).
| yowlingcat wrote:
| Good list. One you're missing is:
|
| e) how you're introduced
|
| Who intros you and how they're connected to the fund matters a
| ton.
|
| As an aside, I think it's true that they're all playing the
| same book -- with the exception of the very top. The playbook
| that the "deal guys" are playing and the long-term lead-the-
| industry game that the leaders are playing are different. The
| former will always say they're the latter but you will notice
| differences in the social network topology (as well as how they
| carry themselves and what their outcomes look like) which will
| clue you in.
| g-unit33 wrote:
| They verify using CrunchBase but lots of companies don't put
| their vcs on their CrunchBase
| Zaheer wrote:
| Another similar project: https://www.backchannel.co/old-home
| Oras wrote:
| Looking promising. Are you going to make it just for VCs or there
| will be a section for angel investors?
| whymauri wrote:
| If it registers on CrunchBase, it should appear on the site --
| is my understanding from the blurb.
| dkfmn wrote:
| I don't think it's a particularly active community but
| http://thefunded.com/ started offering this in the mid 2000s
| yowlingcat wrote:
| Nice find. I had used VCGuide before (mentioned in another
| comment) but I see a different set of reviews than I see in
| VCGuide -- always good to have more data here considering how
| thin it is!
| carfacts wrote:
| Good Accelerators offer this to their cohorts as a service.
| Techstars, which I was a part of, has a login-required site where
| founders post their experiences. Pretty useful to save you time
| with VCs that won't participate in your round because of sector,
| size, competing portco
| di4na wrote:
| Another version: https://www.landscape.vc/
| elite_mgmt wrote:
| Susceptible to gaming by cabals.
|
| For example, a set of fraternal VCs could encourage their
| fraternal entrepreneurs to skew the rankings in their favour and
| against the smaller seed fund rounds.
| axg11 wrote:
| If they're fraternal and supportive with the entrepreneurs
| they've invested in then maybe they deserve to be high up in
| the rankings! /s?
| elite_mgmt wrote:
| Its fraturtles all the way down
| gmays wrote:
| A similar site I've used before is https://www.vcguide.co/
| eatonphil wrote:
| Glassdoor for VCs? Very welcome. Right now I do that by asking
| around and searching HN for comments referencing the VC.
| rmbyrro wrote:
| > generated anonymously and verifiably
|
| People are so naive about how hard it is to _really_ anonymize
| data and how surprisingly easy it could be to deanonymize it that
| I 'd never trust it without:
|
| 1) Some serious explanations and scrutiny about exactly how their
| deanonimization process work
|
| 2) How data leaks are removed from logs and elsewhere
|
| 3) how data is aggregated and presented and what measures are
| taken to prevent deanonimization
|
| Edit: their FAQ is not nearly close to a "serious" discussion.
| And looking at their code is not an efficient way of learning
| whether it's a trustworthy approach.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-05-04 23:01 UTC)